Progressive Feminist: Tammy Bruce, An Oxymoron?

[Christian Zionist]

Adam613 do you know more about Tammy Bruce?  Tammy is filling in for Laura Ingraham in Laura's radio talk show as Laura is on vacation.

http://tammybruce.com/biography.php

Biography

Tammy Bruce is an openly gay, pro-choice, gun owning, pro-death penalty, voted-for-President Bush progressive feminist. She was drawn into feminist activism in the late 1980's to contribute to the ongoing effort to ensure safe and legal abortion for all women. Just two years after joining the National Organization for Women, and with a brand of feminism that places her somewhere between Donna Reed and Thelma and Louise, Ms. Bruce was elected president of the Los Angeles chapter of NOW at the age of 27.

The youngest ever to achieve that position, she doubled the chapter's membership from 2,000 to 4,000 within a year with issue campaigns that introduced a fresh view of feminist activism. In her seven years as president (1990-1996, the longest continuous tenure in the chapter's 30 year history) she mobilized activists locally and nationally on a whole range of issues, including women's image in media, child care, health care, violence against women, economics, and domestic violence. Ms. Bruce also served two years as a member of the National NOW board of directors.

[adam613]

I have heard of Tammy Bruce. I have one of her books, The Death of Right and Wrong. It was one of the first books I got from the Conservative Book Club. (The first 4 books were a dollar each.)

She resigned from the National Organization for Women. Why? Because they were defending people like Andrea Yates who murdered her 5 children. NOW claim she had postpardum depression. They had candlelight services for Andrea. Tammy mentioned that this issue never came up before or after (postpartum depression) this one specific case. So they defended a child killer and they themselves don't believe the PD excuse. She mentioned how NOW criticized Promise Keeper which was made to help Christian men be better father's and husbands. She mentioned how they viciously hate all Christians and the religon they support is Falun Kong.


SHe also admits that when she first joined NOW she was very self centered and narcisistic which is why they wanted her. SHe mentioned how it was all the other left movements like the homosexuals, the blacks, and even trial lawyers are based on everything revolving around me and no concern for anybody else and any rule that limits what I CAN DO is somehow discriminatory. SHe also admitted that NOW has very bad financies as most women don't support it and they are worried about bankrupcy. The concerned women for America group get much more support although she said you wouldn't know it from TV because they continue to act like NOW is a very powerful organization. In terms of federal funding that I don't know. So at this point Tammy openly has contempt for the National Organization of Women which at one point she thought it was a good organization.

Why she still calls herself a feminist I think has to do with partly she wants to attract a larger audience. I also don't think she understands the whole story of feminism just like some don't understand the whole story of the civil rights movement in the 1960's which the feminist movement was part of.  Tammy believes that NOW was once a good organization that was eventually taken over by radicals. She is likely wrong. It is the same thing with the Blacks. Some honestly think Martin Luther King was a good man and it got out of control later on. That is not true. From what I know I am pretty sure that NOW was started by Betty Friedan who was a propogandist for Joseph Stalin and thought he was a good man. Tammy did say that in the 1960's they were against certain early flights that were for MEN ONLY and job advertisements that asked for a specific sex, which likely were males.  I doubt that was all NOW was involved and I feel a company should be able to hire who they want anyway and not interview people who they aren't going to hire anyway.


   Having said that I am NOT against women's rights or mother's rights rights any more then I am against men's rights or father's rights. As you pointed out that daughter of Zelaphchat were allowed to inherit their father's land because there were no sons. The daughters wanted to preserve their fathers name and g-d agreed to allow them to inherit the land to preserve their fathers name and in all cases where there are no sons. I am against Feminism. Feminism is an ISM. They have turned being a women into being part of some nation. Women are all part of their own ethnic group. They are not a nation of women. There is no land or country owned by women only. Women are not in exile. They also believes that women are superior over men in all area's  and that 4,000 years of history is based on men abusing women. This is simply false and untrue. I'm sure reading these posts you can see how feminism has brainwashed some men too.  Some are even interperting the Bible with this anti male bias that I never heard before or read anywhere until I started hearing so called  Rabbi's who are writing books on "Kabalah" for the masses mostly Jewish women who did not grow up in an observant family buy these books so it is good for sales for these "Pseudo" Rabbi's to bash men since mostly women buy their books.

[Lisa]

CZ and Adam,

I also read The Death of Right and Wrong, and briefly met Tammy once at a blogger party.  Her book is good, and I recommend it. 

My impression of her is that she's probably more conservative than she realizes.  I think that's often the case with some gays/lesbians, and people from minority groups.  Actually, you might be surprised to find that there are right leaning gay men and lesbian women out there.

Tammy is also good friends with Dr. Laura, and has publicly defended her against the left wing homosexual groups, whom she referred to as the Gay Gestapo on Hannity & Colmes one time.  In her book Tammy lets a bunch of left wing groups have it.  She describes them as malignant narcissists.  She is also against illegal immigration.

But you should decide for yourselves what you think of her.  She has a blog -- http://www.tammybruce.com.  Her columns also appear on Newsmax.com and Frontpagemag.com. 

[adam613]

>My impression of her is that she's probably more conservative than she realizes.

In my opinion she deserves credit for resigning from NOW and exposing the different liberal groups including the feminists who defend mothers who murder their children. She also mentioned a case in her book of a women who got divorced and brutally murdered her son and she got off because of some illness that had nothing to do with the murder. "On July 26th, 2001 as divorce proceedings were under way Monica Burger killed her son, stabbing the little 2 year old 30 times with a butcher knife." This Monica got off for this because she was MENTALLY ILL.

Having said that, though, she now has her Republican buddies now and I think it is very very bad that she is PRO-CHOICE (and openly says so)  as she says and she is  a so called "progressive feminists." She really has been at the same point for many many years and that is not good. What she did many years ago breaking away from NOW was good but life is a CONTINUOUS growth process and she seems to have stopped growing now that she has her Republican friends.  From her book it is clear she feels it is never good in public policy in the outside world to favor men in any way which I don't support. In certain area's women get special treatment so I think it is only fair that in some other area you give men a break. Not to mention that I doubt very much that NOW wasn't radical in the 60's they just told Tammy the LEAST radical things they did. Feminism is connected to Stalinist and communism. Betty Friedan was a propagandist for Joseph Stalin and founded NOW. Friedan also had a crazy marriage where she would through objects at her husband.

 So while I like the fact that Tammy exposed NOW and resigned from the group since then she is still stuck on that and that was many years ago.

  In terms of gay people being republican I have to be honest. Gay is a behavior not a genetic disease. So someone who is openly gay and supports the Republicans is not someone I would support as a spokesperson for the Republican party. But most gays support the democrats anyway. But the one's that don't I wouldn't trust anyway.

[Gruzinit]

Tammy Bruce may not fit the typical mode for a conservative, i still admire her for her work in exposing the left's intentions. I'm also a fan of Ann Coulter, even though she defends the Bush Administration tooth and nail, she is one of the brightest and intriging figures of todays conservatives, Liberals pee in their pants at the mention of her name!

As a young woman in this debauched society, we are taught to worship the feminists. Tammy was one of the few to expose the self indulgent hypocrisy. Women is China must endure state sanctioned sterilization and  sex selective abortions, in India 10 million female fetuses have been aborted inless than twenty years, leading them to have sex rations of 130 boys for every 100 girls, as opposed to the global norm of 105 to 100. Human trafficking and sex slavery is at an all time high, especially in the former soviet satellites, many whom are being brought to Israel courtesy of the Russian Mob, and the defend a football player who decapitates his wife, a mother who drowns her five children and doctors who profit from sucking the brains out of a fetus. Mean while they bemoan women for  relying on husbands for support -- but pine for a sugar daddy in Uncle Sam, and want the federal gov't  making decisions about healthcare, state sanctioned daycare, retirement savings, and schooling. They tell women to be sexually liberated, but detest men for wanting casual sex and "friends with benefits" instead of serious commitment. There more concerned with the glitzy charity ball than with empowering me, more like indoctrinating me to their ideology, like my grandmother was to worship Marx, Lenin and Stalin in communist Georgia.

If you read her book, The Death of Right and Wrong, Tammy describes how she was manipulated as a teen into a diastrous relationship with an disturbed older women, and how it severly affected the course of her life. While I am not defending her lifestyle, conservatives could use her as a great source in debating. We can learn valuable lessons from where we least expect it. For example, I'm not a big fan of Theodore Herzl, but I learned a valuable lesson from his coverage of the anti-semitic Dreyfus Trial in late 19th century France. No matter how assimilated, wealthy or cultured a jew is, he will always be viewed as a Jew and outsider by the goyim. we've endured enough purges, expulsions, Inquisitions, massacres and holocausts to see that, even though most Jews always seem to forget.

[Lisa]

Just curious Gruzini, are you a woman?  I thought I was the only woman here.  Anway, excellent post. 

Regarding Ann Coulter, although she never bluntly criticizes the President, I don't think she exactly defends him tooth and nail.  I remember during the whole Harriet Miers incident, she warned that Bush would suffer badly for being nice to liberals.  And I also remember her criticizing Bush for using the phrase "doing the jobs Americans won't do."  She pointed out that the President's approval rating would go down every time he would utter that phrase, and she expressed relief when he stopped saying that. 

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Do I know you, Lisa? I think I might.

[Lisa]

Hi Chaimfan, how do you think you might know me?

Lisa

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Hi Lisa, did you ever make posts at christianforums.com?

[Lisa]

No I have not.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Sorry, you reminded me of someone there. God bless and I really admire your posts btw.

[Lisa]

Thank you Chaimfan!  G-d bless you too!  And welcome to this forum.

Lisa

[adam613]

>in India 10 million female fetuses have been aborted

Abortion is abortion regardless of the gender. I know in China there is a shortage of women I did not know that was the case in India, Gruzina. Could you give a source for that as I would be interested in that.

In Judaism you have the reverse problem. It is a problem in Israel too. And that is among men more leave Orthodoxy and you have a shortage of men. I don't know the exact numbers but I have seen it myself and people have told me that there communities have more women then men. I know many Baal Tushuva organization (organizations that bring nonreligious jews back to Judiasm) are more focused on women. Some Jewish women do not care about that. They are more concerned about nonjewish women then their own men which is pretty sad and disgusting. You don't see women being concerned about boys put on ritalin being thrown out of their homes and not being allowed to see their own children. In education today boys have fallen behind because the feminst are constantly pushing that the women are behind educationally even though it isn't true. 57% of grads (you can check the almanac for this stat) are women in college today and that is because they help girls in math and science but these same schools are not allowed to help boys in reading and writing. Millions of dollars oif government funding was to help girls in education in math and science but men boys get no money from the government. So we have problems in the direction of ignoring boys. Then of course you have domestic vioence (which in this country has been politicized) which they give a billion dollars to women and zero to men. So when a mother abuses her son it is much harder to prevent it. So we have our own problems on the male side of the ledger. And of couse women that hate men like this don't like women either who don't share their hatred of men.

[adam613]

Gruzini, I just looked it up and this what I got.

India has one of the worst female mortality rates in the world, with a gender ratio of 0.97. That is, there are only 97 women alive for every 100 men. WHERE DID YOU GET THIS 130:100 ratio from? Furthermore, the 105 ratio was saying that for every 105 women there are 100 men. Not the other way around.
     Quote "Well below the 105 women in North America and Europe".

I know feminist try to constantly promote their agenda by saying that WOMEN ARE SO OPPRESSED and the bigest tactic is just to make up statistics or use statistics and not tell you had they arrived at the statistics. 97 women for 100 men is not perfect and there is a need to make sure women are considered just as important as men are for a society in India but that is much different then 130:100 number you posted gruzini.  This is a 10 times exaggeration Gruzini. 100:97 means for every 100 women there are 103 men which is 3 more men per 100. Your number suggests for every 100 women there are 130 women whihc is 30 more men per 100. Big, big difference.

In fact North America's Ratio 105 women to 100 men is slightly worse then India's ratio of 100 men to 97 women.  But I guess, Gruzini, helping men (in your own country) isn't as politically correct as helping women (who don't live in your country) even if they do legitimately need some concern.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

No prob Lisa! Always great to meet more fellow Kahanists!

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

In Judaism you have the reverse problem. It is a problem in Israel too. And that is among men more leave Orthodoxy and you have a shortage of men. I don't know the exact numbers but I have seen it myself and people have told me that there communities have more women then men.

It seems to be a common problem in the First World that women are more interested in faith than men. In America there are certainly noticeably more female Christians than male and more mixed marriages involving Christian wives and secular husbands than the other way around.

Some Jewish women do not care about that. They are more concerned about nonjewish women then their own men which is pretty sad and disgusting.

Yeah, they have to be good little social activists. 

You don't see women being concerned about boys put on ritalin being thrown out of their homes and not being allowed to see their own children.

Yeah, because the media portays males as the epitome of all evil.

In education today boys have fallen behind because the feminst are constantly pushing that the women are behind educationally even though it isn't true. 57% of grads (you can check the almanac for this stat) are women in college today and that is because they help girls in math and science but these same schools are not allowed to help boys in reading and writing.

It's pretty accepted fact that men tend to be naturally superior in the fine sciences, women in fine rhetoric and composition. Whether that is nature or nuture I don't know--probably some of both.

Then of course you have domestic vioence (which in this country has been politicized) which they give a billion dollars to women and zero to men. So when a mother abuses her son it is much harder to prevent it. So we have our own problems on the male side of the ledger.

Both sexes who practice domestic battery should have the book thrown at them.

And of couse women that hate men like this don't like women either who don't share their hatred of men.

Look forward to much more of the above if the First Dyke becomes our next president.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

In all fairness to Gruzini, women are treated like garbage in many Third World gutter states (such as Islamic reichs) and this needs to be pointed out. But doing so earns you the hatred of the politically-correct relativistic Left most of the time. 

[adam613]

>In all fairness to Gruzini, women are treated like garbage in many Third World gutter states

And so are the men Chaimfan. Not that I really care but Iraq and Iran sent a million men to die on each side because of the dictator's in each country. If any disagrees with the dictator who rule the country the man will be killed. So let's be fair hear Chaim most of the men are treated like garbage too. It is feminist propoganda to think that only women are treated badly in these countires. In most of these countries women outlive men also.

Also, I was annoyed that these statistics Gruzini are completely false and aren't even close to reality. The 105 number was refurring to women not men.  I don't know where the 130 number came from. I don't see what the excuse if for this if you are going to give numbers like this that are so imbalanced you should make sure it is true and these numbers were completely false.

[adam613]

>It seems to be a common problem in the First World that women are more interested in faith than men. In America there are certainly noticeably more female Christians than male and more mixed marriages involving Christian wives and secular husbands than the other way around.

To be honest the reason I think this is, is because Churches emphasize feminine traits more then masculine ones and Judaism has imitated that (or maybe vice versa I don't know.)  JTF doesn't think very highly of the established Orthodoxy so I don't think it is because men are bad that they are not going to churches or synogagues. Here is a book that claims the Church has been feminized and I think the same can be said for the synogague. I haven't read this book so I don't know if all of what he is saying is true. But, yes, I do know being a Jew that the synogogue has certainlly been feminized and they don't care about the guys. (except the male Rabbi of course.) I think it is mostly because the Rabbi's are corrupt men and women are less of a threat to their jobs. The male Rabbi we should always give the benefit of the doubt.  Of course on this site there is an 8 to 1 ratio of men to women. Here is the book though. They ladies against feminism site has this book.

~ The Church Impotent: The Feminization of Christianity
by Leon J. Podles
A look at the history of the Western Church's slide into effiminacy. Podles posits that the feminization of Western Christianity began with the Christian mystics of the 12th and 13th centuries. He critiques both Catholic and Protestant doctrines, and he also digs into sociology, anthropology and psychology in his study of what constitutes masculinity. Absolutely vital to the understanding of the ills of the modern Church. [Not recommended for young readers, since it deals with a few delicate topics.] 

>It's pretty accepted fact that men tend to be naturally superior in the fine sciences, women in fine rhetoric and composition. Whether that is nature or nuture I don't know--probably some of both.

I think it is nature that women are better in composition and men are better in Math. However, the gap in math between men and women is smaller then the gap between men and women in reading and writing. The reason is because the government gives money and help  women in math and science but they don't help men in reading and writing. Men still do better in math but the gap is less then women's higher scores in reading and writing.

Chaimfan wrote:
>Look forward to much more of the above if the First Dyke becomes our next president.

I certainlly hope this doesn't happen.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

You know guys... before you go too much further I do not necessarily hate feminism. Many of the first ones were patriotic, righteous women who opposed such things as women being unable to own any property and it being legal for a man to beat and/or kill his wife at will because she was his property. Fortunately the West saw how insane this is a long time ago and changed its ways. I wish the same could be said for some other parts of the world and their respective religions.

There are, believe it or not, even today many pro-life, right-wing Christian and Jewish feminists who do not hate men and have legitimate points of view and concerns. I am friends with a couple.

[adam613]

>and it being legal for a man to beat and/or kill his wife at will because she was his property.

Excuse me Chaimfan. It was never legal for a husband to kill his wife because she was his property. TO say things like that is hatred of the west.  Judaism recognizes that if a man dies without any male children the property goes to the daughter.

I honestly don't know much about the women before the 1960's feminist movement. But they did not call themselves feminists. They called themselves for women sufferage which is not the same thing. I have read that some of the women who wanted women to vote were connected to abortion although in 2007 it makes no sense for women not to vote. BUt een then if a women was a widow she was allowed to vote. ANy many men couldn't vote either is they did not own property. Things were much different in many area's back then.

>There are, believe it or not, even today many pro-life, right-wing Christian and Jewish feminists who do not hate men and have legitimate points of view and concerns. I am friends with a couple.

Do they have concerns for MEN Chaimfan. If they only care about women in my opinion they are scum and RINO's in my opinion. If your friendly with them I am also disturbed. I don't think a true Kahanist would be friendly with women like this but what do I know. Rabbi Kahane worked for the Jewish Press and that  newspaper does hate men and rarely if ever has articles about issues facing men.  But even though women are more involved in Orthodoxy then men are every other second a women is oppressed according to the Jewish Press and men are jumping for joy all day.
 

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Excuse me Chaimfan. It was never legal for a husband to kill his wife because she was his property. TO say things like that is hatred of the west.  Judaism recognizes that if a man dies without any male children the property goes to the daughter.

Excuse YOU Adam, please check on some history. I was not talking about Judaic culture. At one time states were so libertarian that laws against prostitution, abuse, incest, etc. were often nonexistent. There were many places in early (as in <1850) America where no laws governing family abuse existed.

The West is not perfect and never was... for one thing, a LOT of anti-semitism has come out of it. Even this country has never been perfect. Perfection will only come when we get to heaven.

Do they have concerns for MEN Chaimfan. If they only care about women in my opinion they are scum and RINO's in my opinion. If your friendly with them I am also disturbed. I don't think a true Kahanist would be friendly with women like this but what do I know. Rabbi Kahane worked for the Jewish Press and that  newspaper does hate men and rarely if ever has articles about issues facing men.  But even though women are more involved in Orthodoxy then men are every other second a women is oppressed according to the Jewish Press and men are jumping for joy all day.

Adam, think about that. Why would I be friends with people who hate men. Just think about that for a while before jumping to conclusions about people you do not know.

Hating MODERN feminism does not mean we should hate women or every single principle behind historical feminism. There are oppressed men in this world and oppressed women. Some countries oppress one sex more than the other. Any real Kahanist would fight against both, wherever they are occuring.

[Gruzinit]

Sorry Adam 316, when addressing the the 117 to 100 gender ratio was concerning china, with certain provinces reaching as high as 130 to 100 (based on personal research for a college thesis). This situation is creating a demographic threat, as for india, over the past 2 decades 10 million females were illegally aborted in India, solely because they were girls ( http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50947 ).  I've posted an articled below that better articulates china's infanticide.

While i agree that gender politics is skewed more favorably towards women, what ticks me off is that while this type of injustice is occuring, the feminists are more concerned with getting rid of barbies and easy bake ovens (both of which i owned). If they were so interested in protecting women, why were they pushing for abortion drugs like ru-486, which were used on chinese women like guinea pigs ( http://www.jewishworldreview.com/michelle/malkin102000.asp) ?  Or their silence while thousands of women were being trafficked into Berlin and forced into prostitution as the Germans were preparing to host the World Cup ( http://www.c-fam.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=285&Itemid=102,  http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=33590 ). These are real issues facing women today, issues they have failed to address because it doesn't fit their agenda.



I hope all is forgiven, since iv'e provided and abundant amount of resources for my previous mistake!

http://web.lexisnexis.com.central.ezproxy.cuny.edu:2048/universe/document_m=8fee283b7e93731d076215875c090cf0&_docnum=4&wchp=dGLbVtz-zSkVb&_md5=ac9ebef8760d1e3553f4cc21981b7922


Copyright 2006 Financial Times Information
All Rights Reserved
Global News Wire - Asia Africa Intelligence Wire
Copyright 2006 BBC Monitoring/BBC Source: Financial Times Information Limited
BBC Monitoring International Reports

August 11, 2006 Friday

ACC-NO: A200608113C-11FA2-GNW

LENGTH: 504 words

HEADLINE: CHINESE SCHOLAR WARNS OF "SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES" OF GENDER IMBALANCE

BODY:


Text of report in English by official Chinese news agency Xinhua (New China News Agency)

Beijing, 11 August: China's unbalanced sex ratio may cause serious consequences as millions of men will be unlikely to find their spouses around 2020, said a Chinese demographer.

A growing gender imbalance among newborns will cause consequences much more serious than expected, said Prof Mu Guangzhong with the population research institute of Beijing University in an article published by the latest issue of Study Times [Xuexi Shibao].

According to statistics of the State Commission for Population and Family Planning (SCPFP), there will be 25 million men who fail to have wives around 2020 if the current gender imbalance keeps on.

The article in the official periodical of the Party School of the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party warned that efforts by the central government to improve females' status may only help alleviate the problem.

Mu's views are likely to prompt the government to consider more forceful measures to reverse the trend after the legislature scrapped an amendment to the Criminal Law to outlaw sex-selective abortions.

The aborted amendment called for fines and prison terms of up to three years for aborting a fetus based on gender of the fetus, but some lawmakers argued that it is hard to collect evidence and pregnant women should enjoy the right to know the sex of their unborn child.

In China, where sons are traditionally preferred and most couples can have only one child, a number of prospective parents used to abort their pregnancy if tests showed the fetus was female.

As a result, there are 119 boys born for every 100 girls in China, much higher than the global ratio of 103 to 107 boys for 100 girls.

Only seven out of 31 provinces, regions and municipalities report a gender ratio below 110 boys to 100 girls and boys under the age of nine outnumber girls in the same age group by 12.77 million.

Analysts fear that the shortage of women as a result of growing gender imbalance may lead to more prostitutes or social crimes in the future.

SCPFP's vice-minister Zhao Baige said officials would be sent around the country to monitor gender ratios among newborn babies and the efficiency of measures against the sex imbalance later this year.

The government will introduce a system to evaluate local officials' efforts in controlling gender imbalance and those who have bad performance will be punished, she said.

The commission has launched a programme called "Care for Girls" in 2003 in 24 pilot counties provides social benefits, including cash payments, to families with only girls, in order to boost the status of girls and women.

The programme is credited with reducing the boys-to-girls ratio in those counties from 133.8/100 to 119.6/100 over the past three years.

It will be promoted to all provinces, regions and municipalities this year to curb the male-dominated gender imbalance.

Source: Xinhua news agency, Beijing, in English 1142 gmt 11 Aug 06

BBC Monitoring

LOAD-DATE: August 11, 2006

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Interesting posts, Gruzini. We should all be aware of what goes on in those parts of the world.

[Hail Columbia]

The Chinese gender imbalance, according to Michael Savage, is designed so that the People's Republic of China can develop an army as large as the difference between males and females.  Such an army, who have no women to attach themselves, will make the People's Republic of China a superpower.